JAYSHREEBEN MANILAL VISABHAI PURABIYA Vs. CHANDRAKANT BABULAL MAKWANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have filed this Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Hereinafter referred to as Cr. P. C.) and challenged the order passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No. 2, Ahmedabad on 15-11-2006 in Cri. Misc. Application No. 395 of 2006 and rejected the application filed by the petitioners u/s 127 of the Cr. P. C. for enhancement of the maintenance.

(2.) PETITIONER No. 1 is the wife and petitioner No. 2 is the son of the respondent. The petitioners filed Cri. Misc. Application No. 6658 of 2000 before Family Court, Ahmedabad against the respondent - husband and claimed maintenance u/s 125 of the Cr. P. C. The Court after considering the evidence awarded Rs. 500/- p. m. to the petitioner - wife and Rs. 250/- p. m. to the son towards maintenance from the date of the application and also directed to pay Rs. 250/- towards costs. The petitioners moved Cri. Misc. Application Nos. 1449 of 2003 and 394 of 2006 for execution of the order u/s 125 (3) of the Cr. P. C. The trial court sentenced the respondent for nonpayment of arrears of maintenance. The petitioners also filed Cri. Misc. Application No. 395 of 2006 u/s 127 of the Cr. P. C. for enhancement of the maintenance amount awarded by the court on the ground of change in circumstances. The trial court rejected the application and therefore the petitioners have filed this criminal revision application.

(3.) I have heard learned advocate Mr. B. N. Patel for the petitioners. The Board indicates that notice of Rule is served to the respondent - husband. But none appears on behalf of the respondent. I have also heard learned A. P. P. Mr. K. C. Shah for the respondent - State.